Do not post private personal information about yourself or others.(ie addresses, phone #s)

Violations will be deleted and you may be banned. Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.

Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.

Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls
to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They
reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.

Obviously, Reality, Obama orchestrated the Libyan revolution, and his administration, along with some three dozen or so other countries, recognized the TNC as the legitimate government of Libya, so that Al Qaeda could someday rule the land.

Yes Reality. Dronebama removed Qaddafi who had previously kept AlQueada out of power in Libya. Now he seems to have no freaking plans or desire to assist Libya in stopping radical Islamists from taking control of the country. I wouldn’t expect you to see the link though; cause you still deny that the Obama/US was ever even at war with Libya.

Alexandra and truthseeker, you both display the most extraordinary leap of logic I have seen. The utter lack of any facts to link the two ends of your argument that any of this is obama’s doing is huge.

I think probably at roughly the same moment. He swung in like Tarzan on a rope made from disrespected American flags, shot Gaddafi, planted the Al Qaeda flag, stopped in Kenya to catch up on the taxpayer’s dime, and was home in time for a commie sustainably-grown, healthy dinner that probably included arugula.

“The utter lack of any facts to link the two ends of your argument that any of this is obama’s doing is huge.”

‘Reality’,
I have a question for you. I heard that Obama ordered the drone strike that took out Qaddafi’s convoy with hellfire missiles. Does that mean Obama is partially responsible for taking out Qaddifi’s convoy or not?

Seriously, I wonder if you’ll say no, it was NATO’s call. lol Your mind is really obtuse. When confronted with people who speak the truth with you face to face do you go “nahnahnahnahnah, I can’t here you”; or do you just space it out completely !

‘Reality’,
According to former US Secretary of State Gates the US funds 75% of NATO’s military capacity on an ongoing basis. It is no small wonder that 70 US aircraft can carry out thousands of aerial missions and US drones can carry out 145 strikes on Libyan targets and still you are able to bend your mind into claiming the US is not responsible for the attacks.

Your completely irrational or in denial or both. By your logic you think you could build a bomb, join a local gang and blow up a building and not hold yourself responsible for it in any way because you were a member of the gang when you carried out the attack. They have a name for people who would behave like that; they are called cowards and weasels.

“70 US aircraft can carry out thousands of aerial missions and US drones can carry out 145 strikes on Libyan targets” – is that intended to be your evidence for “Obama ordered the drone strike that took out Qaddafi’s convoy with hellfire missiles”?

“Your(sic) completely irrational or in denial or both” – nah, I just stick to facts. Your analogy doesn’t quite match the NATO/obama interaction.

Reality,
All I did is supply you with the facts. You didn’t seem to be able tomprehend how Obama had anything to do with the fact that their is an AlQaeda flag flying over the courthouse in Libya. When I explained that it was the US that is responsible for 75% of NATO’s military capacity and that 70 US aircraft carried out thousands of aerial missions and US drones carried out 145 strikes on Libyan targets including a drone strike of hellfire missiles on the Qaddafi’s convoy when he was captured and killed.

‘Reality’,
You have a problem recognizing that as Commander and Chief of the US forces Obama played a direct role in the overthrow of the Qadaffi regime in Libya. You are so far removed from reality that you deny our president was in any way responsible for those actions. And your logic/proof for your denial is that “it was NATO’s call” not Obama’s. Obtuse and in denial only begins to describe your mind.

There must be proof of Obama’s non-involvement that you are not sharing with me. Maybe you could shed some light on this for me and explain why Obama is not at all responsible for US military strikes on Libya and the consequences of the strikes.

Nor have you provided any reasons, let alone evidence, for obama having anything to do with the flying of the flag.

No, he’s not. The only ‘responsibility’ he has in all this is that he hasn’t taken the US out of NATO. NATO protected the civilians of Libya and the Libyans themselves took out the TOT. I think NATO’s actions simply brought the Libyan peoples’ removal of the TOT a bit sooner than may otherwise have happened.

Since obama leads the US and the US is part of NATO and NATO took defensive strikes to protect the civilians of Libya he does have some responsibility, as I clearly stated above.
I disgree that NATO’s actions are responsible for the consequences that you claim though. Therefore obama isn’t responsible for the consequences that you claim he is either.

Obama keeping his hands off the Bush tax cuts is one of the few good decisions he’s made. His reluctant continuation of military policies (Iraq, Afghanistan, Gitmo, drones) until he absolutely had to begin appeasing his base has been good too.

But his getting in touch with his inner Rambo (a complete 180 from his campaign) will no more save him than it did the presidency and reputation of the Bushes.

Since obama leads the US and the US is part of NATO and NATO took defensive strikes to protect the civilians of Libya he does have some responsibility, as I clearly stated above. I disgree that NATO’s actions are responsible for the consequences that you claim though. Therefore obama isn’t responsible for the consequences that you claim he is either.

Oh revelation! Now lets try and go one step further. Is one of those consequences that Commander and Chief Obama is partially responsible for the ouster and death of Colonel Moammar Qaddafi?

Here is what we are up against—no matter how many facts we present there are some people who will not let the facts interrupt their need for a comfort zone in their thinking. This is the most difficult hurdle for some people to overcome. The hard work of intellectual honesty demands sometimes having to accept incontestable evidence that what one may have thought for years was true actually turns out to be false. To be brutally honest with oneself and admit error is too much for some people. But of course if they dine on main stream media as their only course they are unlikely to ever have to face reality.

Main stream media as opposed to what, WorldNutDaily? I’d rather gather and assess information from a range of sources.
Conspiracy theory rags which back up conspiracy theorist thinking isn’t evidence.
I think that mostly non-partisan and rational media is the healthiest course on which to dine.

Since obama leads the US and the US is part of NATO and NATO took defensive strikes to protect the civilians of Libya he does have some responsibility, as I clearly stated above.

Reality, I have given you facts. Here are the facts I have given you so far:
The US is responsible for 75% of NATO’s military capacity and that 70 US aircraft carried out thousands of aerial missions and US drones carried out 145 strikes on Libyan targets including a drone strike of hellfire missiles on the Qaddafi’s convoy when he was captured and killed.

Do you dispute them. It is all common knowledge to most US citizens who follow our government. In fact this information comes from our military commanders. I have provided you with links to some of it in the past. I can provide you with corroborating articles on the Internet if you tell me which parts in particular you dispute.

But lets try this again as simply as possible. I have gotten you to say that Obama is partially responsible for some of the consequence of the NATO Libyan war. Tell me more precisely what consequences of the NATO Libyan invasion you deem Obama to be partially responsible for?

No truthseeker, you keep giving me your claims. Until you provide evidence to support them then they are simply your claim of ‘facts’.

I do recall that when this topic came up before you provided some links. I certainly don’t recall them corroborating your claims very well. Perhaps if you provide them again I can peruse them again (I’m not just trying to be difficult on this point).
I also provided links which refuted your claim of ‘75%’. Do you recall those?

I have yet to see any evidence for your claim that “70 US aircraft carried out thousands of aerial missions (two thousand or twenty thousand?) and US drones carried out 145 strikes on Libyan targets” particularly “including a drone strike of hellfire missiles on the Qaddafi’s convoy when he was captured and killed.”

“It is all common knowledge to most US citizens who follow our government.” – I kinda doubt that.

“Tell me more precisely what consequences of the NATO Libyan invasion you deem Obama to be partially responsible for” – invasion? What invasion? Weren’t you previously complaining about a lack of ‘boots on the ground’?

And here is the reference; historically 50% and now 75%:
“Thus, for most of the Cold War U.S. governments could justify defense investments and costly forward bases that made up roughly 50 percent of all NATO military spending. But some two decades after the collapse of the Berlin Wall, the U.S. share of NATO defense spending has now risen to more than 75 percent – at a time when politically painful budget and benefit cuts are being considered at home.”

Please link to a source for your numbers cause they don’t jibe with reality ;)

I have yet to see any evidence for your claim that “70 US aircraft carried out thousands of aerial missions (two thousand or twenty thousand?) and US drones carried out 145 strikes on Libyan targets” particularly “including a drone strike of hellfire missiles on the Qaddafi’s convoy when he was captured and killed.”

In regard to the attack on the TOT’s convoy, I see the article states that “The officials said the Predator fired on the convoy as it was fleeing Sirte, and French aircraft launched guided missiles. According to most accounts two vehicles in the convoy were hit.
Gadhafi was wounded when captured, and he later died. He had gunshot wounds to his head, chest and stomach.” not missile injuries.

Obama is partially responsible for protecting the lives of numerous Libyan citizens via the auspices of NATO.

Reality, I am somewhat fascinated by your illogical and completely irrational insistence that these same bombardments that “defended” the Libyan people played no role whatsoever in the overthrow of the Qadaffi regime in Libya. However, such insistence to repeated lack of logic over and over makes you appear to others you dialogue with as being either in almost complete denial of reality or a troll.

Lets go over this one more time. As a result of the US military funding and participating in the NATO bombardment of Libya’ you have conceded that “Obama is partially responsible for protecting the lives of numerous Libyan citizens via the auspices of NATO.” My question to you is this. Why do you refuse to concede that Obama is partially responsible for the NATO bombardment that ousted Qaddafi via the auspices of NATO when you yourself have already stated that these Libyans citizens could not even defend themselves from Qadaffi with the same bonbardment?

BTW- all your articles confirm/agree with what Gates says. I will paste it again here for you with <strong>bold</strong> on the key words so you can grasp what he is saying.
“Thus, for most of the Cold War U.S. governments could justify defense investments and costly forward bases that made up roughly 50 percent of all NATO <strong>military</strong> spending. But some two decades after the collapse of the Berlin Wall, the U.S. share of NATO <strong>defense</strong> spending has now risen to more than 75 percent – at a time when politically painful budget and benefit cuts are being considered at home.”

No they don’t. They all mention percentages in the low 20’s. Adding about 22% – 24% in each of three different sectors (civil, military and NSIP) does not equate to 75% overall. Heard of averages? How are you reaching the number you claim?

You’re still clinging to the words of what one man said. One of the links I provided was a report for congress.

I did not state that the Libyan citizens could not even defend themselves.

I did not state that the Libyan citizens could not even defend themselves.

If they didn’t need defending then why did you say “Obama is partially responsible for protecting the lives of numerous Libyan citizens via the auspices of NATO?” And according to you fearless leader Barck Hussein Obama he was stopping a genocide. Do you disagree with him that his bombardment was necessary in order to stop a genocide?

So you like to have your cake and eat it too.
Barack defended the people but they didn’t need defending.
He liberated the people that did not need liberating.
He bombarded the people with bombs but they did not need bombarding.
He facilitated the imprisonment and torture of thousands of Libyan people by the “rebels” that did not need imprisonment.
He expedited an Islamist takeover and the creation of an AlQaeda safe haven he did not need to expedite.
His actions helped AlQaeda take positions of power in the country and raise their flag on the courthouse in Benghazi but he did not mean to.

“Barack defended the people but they didn’t need defending.” – that’s still not what I said.
“He liberated the people that did not need liberating.” – nope.
“He bombarded the people with bombs but they did not need bombarding.” – nope.
“He facilitated the imprisonment and torture of thousands of Libyan people by the “rebels” that did not need imprisonment.” – nope.
“He expedited an Islamist takeover and the creation of an AlQaeda safe haven he did not need to expedite.” – nope.
“His actions helped AlQaeda take positions of power in the country and raise their flag on the courthouse in Benghazi but he did not mean to.” – nope.

I don’t think you even what you say half the time. Make up your mind will you.

First ‘Reality’ says:“I think NATO’s actions simply brought the Libyan peoples’ removal of the TOT a bit sooner than may otherwise have happened.”

Then truthseeker says:
“Is one of those consequences that Commander and Chief Obama is partially responsible for the ouster and death of Colonel Moammar Qaddafi?”

The ‘Reality’ says:“Nup”

Then truhseeker says:
“Tell me more precisely what consequences of the NATO Libyan bombardment you deem Obama to be partially responsible for”

‘Reality’ says:“Since obama leads the US and the US is part of NATO and NATO took defensive strikes to protect the civilians of Libya he does have some responsibility, as I clearly stated above.”

You say Obama the US is not responsible for bombing Libya because it was NATO’s call. Then you say Obama is partially responsible for defensive strikes to protect thousands of Libyans under the auspices of NATO. Then you deny that the Libyan people couldn’t defend themselves????? It has become a joke even asking you to answer even simple questions because your answers are meaningless. It is appearant that your ‘Reality’ is an ever morphing virtual state of denial. And the saddest part is that you unabashedly post the ‘reality’ inside your head for everybody to see. Your obtuse sequence of comments above are not from the mind of a rational person.

The fact that NATO’s actions protected some of Libya’s population and may have tightened the timeline on the removal of the TOT does not mean that NATO or obama is responsible for the TOT’s removal.

Just because NATO protected the civilians and fighters doesn’t mean that they couldn’t defend themselves. NATO assisted them in defending themselves.

Ever heard of nuance? Assistance? Contribution?

In various aspects, NATO’s actions had an influence but did not change the overall event or it’s outcomes. The role of the US in NATO’s actions was a portion of that. So overall the US impact was relatively minor.

The most powerful military in the world uses 70 warplanes and multiple drones to deliver approximately a billion dollars in aerial bombardments and completely decimates an existing government’s military and your appraisal is that it had a ‘relatively minor’ impact. Keep it coming ‘Reality’. This is a halloween thread after all. ;)

Reality, does the fact that the US funds 75% of NATO’s military budget mean that the US is 20% responsible for NATO military actions? lol

‘Reality’,
Did the NATO military destroying all of Qadaffi’s communications systems and air power and his ability to use heavy military equiptment like tanks have much impact on Qadaffi’s military capabilities?

You still claiming that 75% bit are you? Incredible. What one person said once against all the sources and reports, including one to congress. I linked three of the many while all you show is what Gates said.
You’re really going to stand by it are you?

NATO didn’t destroy all of the TOT’s communications systems, air power and heavy military equipment like tanks.

‘Reality’,
I will type this for you one time again really slow.
The US funds 75% of NATO’s military/defense budget. None of your links contradict that fact. Where they reference the 20% figure they are not referencing NATO’s military/defense spending are they?

At Carafem, staff members plan to greet clients with warm teas, comfortable robes and a matter-of-fact attitude.

“We don’t want to talk in hushed tones,” said Carafem president Christopher Purdy. “We use the A-word.”…

Because Carafem will offer only the abortion pill, not vacuum aspiration or other surgical procedures, prospective clients must be no more than 10 weeks pregnant….

After receiving counseling and some basic tests, Carafem clients will take an initial pill at the clinic. Purdy’s team expects to get them in and out quickly, within about 60 minutes. They will be sent home with a second set of pills to take the next day. The second dose induces the abortion, which resembles a miscarriage, typically within six hours.

By offering only pharmaceutical abortions, Purdy says, he can avoid purchasing expensive surgical equipment and keep prices low for clients. The average pharmaceutical abortion cost about $500 in the United States in 2011, Guttmacher figures show; Purdy plans to charge around $400.

Another striking aspect of the project is the design: The clinic will have wood floors and a natural wood tone on the walls that recalls high-end salons such as Aveda. Appointments, offered evenings and weekends, can be booked online or via a 24-hour hotline.

“It was important for us to try to present an upgraded, almost spa-like feel,” said Melissa S. Grant, vice president of health services for the clinic.

If the project is successful, Purdy says, he hopes to expand his model to other states.